Literature DB >> 33514136

Gradual decay and sudden death of short-term memory for pitch.

Samuel R Mathias1, Leonard Varghese2, Christophe Micheyl3, Barbara G Shinn-Cunningham4.   

Abstract

The ability to discriminate frequency differences between pure tones declines as the duration of the interstimulus interval (ISI) increases. The conventional explanation for this finding is that pitch representations gradually decay from auditory short-term memory. Gradual decay means that internal noise increases with increasing ISI duration. Another possibility is that pitch representations experience "sudden death," disappearing without a trace from memory. Sudden death means that listeners guess (respond at random) more often when the ISIs are longer. Since internal noise and guessing probabilities influence the shape of psychometric functions in different ways, they can be estimated simultaneously. Eleven amateur musicians performed a two-interval, two-alternative forced-choice frequency-discrimination task. The frequencies of the first tones were roved, and frequency differences and ISI durations were manipulated across trials. Data were analyzed using Bayesian models that simultaneously estimated internal noise and guessing probabilities. On average across listeners, internal noise increased monotonically as a function of increasing ISI duration, suggesting that gradual decay occurred. The guessing rate decreased with an increasing ISI duration between 0.5 and 2 s but then increased with further increases in ISI duration, suggesting that sudden death occurred but perhaps only at longer ISIs. Results are problematic for decay-only models of discrimination and contrast with those from a study on visual short-term memory, which found that over similar durations, visual representations experienced little gradual decay yet substantial sudden death.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33514136      PMCID: PMC7803383          DOI: 10.1121/10.0002992

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am        ISSN: 0001-4966            Impact factor:   1.840


  42 in total

1.  The effects of intervening interference on working memory for sound location as a function of inter-comparison interval.

Authors:  Dennis T Ries; Traci R Hamilton; Aurora J Grossmann
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2010-06-12       Impact factor: 3.208

2.  The slow formation of a pitch percept beyond the ending time of a short tone burst.

Authors:  Laurent Demany; Catherine Semal
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  2005-11

3.  Auditory change detection: simple sounds are not memorized better than complex sounds.

Authors:  Laurent Demany; Wiebke Trost; Maja Serman; Catherine Semal
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2008-01

4.  Stimulus-specific mechanisms of visual short-term memory.

Authors:  S Magnussen; M W Greenlee; R Asplund; S Dyrnes
Journal:  Vision Res       Date:  1991       Impact factor: 1.886

5.  Intensity perception. VII. Further data on roving-level discrimination and the resolution and bias edge effects.

Authors:  J E Berliner; N I Durlach; L D Braida
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 1.840

6.  Memory for visual motion.

Authors:  R Blake; N J Cepeda; E Hiris
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 3.332

7.  Backward recognition masking in relative pitch judgments.

Authors:  D W Massaro; W L Idson
Journal:  Percept Mot Skills       Date:  1977-08

8.  Delayed monochromatic hue matches indicate characteristics of visual memory.

Authors:  T H Nilsson; T M Nelson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1981-02       Impact factor: 3.332

9.  Characterizing the dependence of pure-tone frequency difference limens on frequency, duration, and level.

Authors:  Christophe Micheyl; Li Xiao; Andrew J Oxenham
Journal:  Hear Res       Date:  2012-07-25       Impact factor: 3.208

10.  Resource allocation and prioritization in auditory working memory.

Authors:  S Kumar; S Joseph; B Pearson; S Teki; Z V Fox; T D Griffiths; M Husain
Journal:  Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2013-08-21       Impact factor: 3.065

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.